From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...
Beaver v. Brumlow
New Mexico Court of Appeals
231 P.3d 628 (2010)
Michael and Karen Brumlow (plaintiffs) entered into an oral agreement with Warren and Betty Beaver (defendants) to purchase a parcel of real property located on the Beavers’ 24-acre tract. Michael worked for the race horse transportation business owned and operated by the Beavers. Thereafter, Michael and Warren walked and marked off the specific boundaries of the proposed parcel of property to be sold. Additionally, the Brumlows cashed in their IRA and 401(k) retirement plans to pay for the home and improvements. The Brumlows placed a mobile home on the proposed property, spent approximately $85,000 making improvements, and moved in. No formal sale documents were prepared because the Beavers learned that their mortgage contained a due-on-sale clause that required the entire amount to be paid when the land was sold. When the Brumlows consistently requested that a contract for the sale be formalized, they were told “we will work it out,” by the Beavers. Although a date was never mentioned for the sale of the property and a price was never determined, the Brumlows had stated that they would pay the market price for the land. After leaving the employment of the Beavers and working for a competitor, the relationship between the Brumlows and Beavers deteriorated. Thereafter, the Beavers changed their minds about selling the land to the Brumlows and, instead, attempted to lease the property to them. At that point the Brumlows had been living on the property for nearly three years. The Beavers also attempted to eject the Brumlows from their property. The Brumlows brought suit against the Beavers to enforce the oral agreement to purchase the property. At trial, the Beavers argued that enforcement of the oral agreement was barred by the statute of frauds. The trial court disagreed and ordered specific performance of the contract to sell the property. The Beavers appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Vigil, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 619,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 619,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.